Re: [css3-flexbox] is 'wrap-reverse' confusing?

On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 5:42 AM, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu
<kennyluck@csail.mit.edu> wrote:
> (12/07/06 15:24), Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> I'll start by saying that I'm extremely disinclined to make any syntax
>> changes that aren't related to fixing an error in the spec.  Mild,
>> arguable improvements to the usability of a name aren't worth
>> disturbing the syntax at this point in the spec's life.
>
> Sure. Besides making my concern clear, I have no strong opinion on this
> unless a Web developer supports my idea. I have found no one at the moment.
>
>> Responding to the actual proposal, I don't find it an improvement.  I
>> don't think it's worse, it's just not better.  "wrap-reverse"
>> parallels row/column-reverse - I think the fact that it means exactly
>> the same thing makes it easier to learn and remember. If we were to
>> change wrap in this way, I'd want to change row/column in the same
>> way, with optional "to start/end/head/foot" values as appropriate.
>
> That would be fine by me and it addresses my concern. I am only finding
> 'wrap-reverse' confusing because I interpret it as the S shape.

I haven't seen anyone else with that confusion, and as far as I can
tell the only way you could develop that interpretation is by not
reading the spec or looking at any of the diagrams, so I'm going to
claim that the spec is fine.  ^_^  Similar uses of "reverse" in other
properties, such as "animation-direction: reverse;" don't do anything
like an S-shape either (you have to use "alternate" for that).

~TJ

Received on Monday, 9 July 2012 23:37:56 UTC